Introduction
It has been said that the
cross of Christ is the most recognisable symbol in human history.
However, that something is well–known is not the same
as being
well–understood, and it is obvious that the minds of many are
informed, not by the Bible, but by superstition and sentimentality.
As in all matters, there is a need to examine what the Scriptures
actually say (see Rom. 4: 3).
The Physical Act
The first thing to note is that the Bible
provides no information whatsoever on the shape of the cross. Peter
tells us that Christ “himself bore our sins in his body on the
tree”, and the word tree here
(xulon)
simply means a piece of timber, whether living or dead. The same word is used for
sticks (see Matt. 26: 47),
stocks (see Acts 16: 24),
and wood (Rev. 18: 12),
and is also used in Acts 5: 30; 10: 39; 13: 29 where it is sometimes
translated cross.
Paul also uses
xulon
in
Galatians 3: “Christ has redeemed us out of the curse of the law,
having become a curse for us, (for it is written, Cursed [is] every
one hanged upon
a tree,)” (v 13, my
emphasis; see Deut. 21: 23). Such a method of execution was clearly
intended to be a
public spectacle. Thus
in Ezra 6: 11, King Darius announces that “I have given order that
whosoever shall alter this rescript, let timber be pulled down from
his house, and being set up, let him be hanged thereon”. Closely
related to this (but not in the sense of ridicule) is what is taught
in John 3: 14: “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the
wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up, that everyone who
believes on him may [not perish, but] have life eternal”. The
reference is to Num. 21: 9 where the brazen serpent was put upon a
pole, the Hebrew word for which is elsewhere translated
sign (see Num. 26: 10),
banner (as in Is. 30: 17:
“banner on a hill”), and sail
(see Is. 33: 23). The thought is clearly something
intended to be seen.
Now while
xulon
simply means a piece of timber, the word
most commonly translated cross in the NT
(staurος)
always carries with it the idea of wood used for a judicial purpose.
From
staurος
is derived the verb
staurow—this is
translated crucify 44 times in the NT. The words
crucify and cross are thus
intimately related.
There is also another unrelated word translated
crucify in Acts 2: 23—prosphgnumi—but
this simply means to fix
or fasten. That such fastening would at least partially (if not
entirely) be by nails is clear from John 20: 25 and Col. 2: 14.
Remarkably, however, not a bone of the Lord was broken (see John 19:
36), even though the force used to administer the nails would have
been considerable.
The Public Image
Crucifixion, and more
particularly the cross of Christ, have been somewhat sanitised in
the modern world. Thus the religious crucifix generally presents a
palatable image of a hardly damaged man—which sits somewhat
incongruously with the prophecy of Is. 52: 14. Again, thousands wear
a cross simply as a piece of jewellery—a practice which would have
baffled anyone from the ancient world. Crucifixion was a
shameful thing, not
something to be delighted in—a grotesque horror that the authorities
used to terrify the masses into subjugation. The extreme nature of
this form of punishment is evidenced by the language of Phil. 2: 8:
“becoming obedient even unto death, and [that the] death of [the]
cross”. And yet the Lord Jesus “endured [the] cross, having
despised [the] shame”
(Heb. 12: 2, my emphasis). There is no doubt He felt the derision
and humiliation of the cross—the word
endured proves that—but He counted it as nothing “in view of the joy
lying before him”. When Peter forcefully declares to the nation of
Israel that “this Jesus whom ye have crucified” God has made “both
Lord and Christ” (Acts 2: 36), the contrast between the degradation
of the cross and Christ’s subsequent exaltation could not be
plainer.
There is little or no offence in
preaching Christ. Many are prepared to listen to expositions of His
moral teaching, and most think it regrettable that such ‘a good man’
was put to death. They can tolerate Christ
without the cross
because this allows them to imagine that the adamic nature is
redeemable and that moral reform is all that is required for
themselves. Writing to the Philippians, Paul laments that “many walk
of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that
they [are] the enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil. 3: 18). He
does not say that such were enemies of Christ, but that they were
enemies of
the cross of Christ.
This brings into relief the primary error of these professors. They
minded “earthly things” (v19), because their religion was suited to
fallen man and his world. Paul’s gospel, by contrast, saw the cross
as the condemnation of everything that now attaches to the first
order of man. His hope lay in another man in another world for “our commonwealth has its existence in [the] heavens, from which also
we await the Lord Jesus Christ [as] Saviour” (v20). The apostle
preached “Christ
crucified” (1 Cor. 1: 23, my emphasis) and then, as now, such
preaching was viewed as objectionable and stupid. To the Jews the
cross of Christ was “an offence”—this did not fit in with their
concept of the Messiah. They looked for a glorious personage who
would bring in national salvation, not a contemptible Galilean who
would not only die, but die in a way that their own Scriptures
declared to be accursed. The signs that they wanted were those that
indicated kingly power, and they certainly attached no credence to
One who was “crucified in weakness” (2 Cor. 13: 4). As for the
Greeks—those who made so much of the human intellect—the preaching
or “word of the cross” was “foolishness” (1 Cor. 1: 18). Human
wisdom would argue ‘How could a dead man save?’ And yet, “had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of
glory”! (1 Cor. 2: 8, my emphasis). At the cross, every sort of
man—cultural, political and religious—were represented in Pilate’s
inscription being written “in Greek, and Roman, and Hebrew letters”
(Luke 23: 38), thus exposing the complete bankruptcy of the human
condition. The purpose of the gospel therefore is to “deliver us out
of the present evil world” (Gal. 1: 4).
Thus to Paul, preaching Christ crucified
was not a side–issue to his ministry, or a passing fad, but the very
kernel of all that he stood for. In Galatia he preached his message
with such vivid imagery that he could say “O senseless Galatians,
who has bewitched you; to whom,
as before your very eyes,
Jesus Christ has been
portrayed, crucified [among you]” (Gal. 3: 1, my emphasis). To
the Corinthians he could say “I did not judge [it well] to know
anything among you
save Jesus Christ, and him
crucified” (1 Cor. 2: 2, my emphasis). The Galatian error was
essentially Judaism refurbished, and so the apostle speaks in
chapter 5 of “the scandal” (or offence) “of the cross” (v11). At its
root, the error at Corinth was Grecian conceit, which is why Paul is
at pains to say that he had been sent to “preach glad tidings; not
in wisdom of word, that the cross of the Christ may not be made
vain” (1 Cor. 1: 17). Thus he was with the Corinthians “in weakness
and in fear and in much trembling; and my word and my preaching, not
in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of [the] Spirit
and of power; that your faith might not stand in men’s wisdom, but
in God’s power” (1 Cor. 2: 3–5). Thus in both Corinthians and
Galatians the cross is brought in as the death–knell of everything
in which man naturally might make much of himself.
Sins, the Old Man and the
Flesh
Many Christians do not view
the cross of Christ as anything other than a ticket for heaven. That
Christ “bore our sins in his body on the tree” is blessedly true, as
is what follows shortly thereafter: “by whose stripes ye have been
healed” (1 Pet. 2: 24). Why, however, pass over what the apostle
writes between these two Scriptures: “in order that, being dead to
sins, we may live to righteousness”? According to this Scripture,
the reason why Christ bore
our sins in his body on the tree is the effect that it has on our
lives
on earth now. Being
dead to sins means having done with them. This is not, of course,
the only reason why the Lord died for us, but it immediately begs
the question as to whether the ticket–for–heaven believer has really
understood what it means to be a Christian. In v21 Christ is
presented as the One in whose steps we should follow. The next verse
then describes four characteristics of this model, the first of
which is that He “did no sin” (v 22). Can we follow Christ there?
The Spirit of God through Peter clearly expects us to. We can very
well imagine that in heaven we will be dead to sins, but that is not
what Peter is saying. It is Christians,
in this world, and
now.
Paul takes this doctrine further than Peter in
that he speaks of the cross not only in relation to sins but also in
relation to our sinful nature. This introduces us to another Greek
word:
sustaurow
or
crucify
with. Now just as the thieves on
Golgotha’s hill were crucified
with Christ (see Matt.
27: 44), so also “our old man has been
crucified with [him],
that the body of sin might be annulled, that we should no longer
serve sin. For he that has died is justified from sin” (Rom. 6: 6,
7, my emphasis). The cross here is not presented as a ticket for
heaven but as a
judicial condemnation
of all that is in us that relates to man as a fallen race. Why? In
order that “we should no longer serve sin”. A crucified man may well
linger in life, but he has the sentence of death irrevocably upon
him. It is the same with the “old man”. Scripture does not say that
the old man is dead—otherwise the exhortation to “neither yield your
members instrument of unrighteousness to sin” (v13) would be
meaningless—but in the cross God has announced that He has finished
with him. It is something that God has already done: our old man “has
been crucified” (my emphasis) What we need to do is accept
God’s testimony about what He has done to the old man and having
formed the same judgement as God about that character of man, we
reckon ourselves “dead to
sin and alive to God
in Christ Jesus”
(v11). Of course we may not feel dead to sin (or alive to God), but
that is because we are looking in the wrong place. We are dead to
sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus. Thus in Galatians 5, the
believer is said to be one who has “crucified the flesh with
the passions and the lusts” (Gal. 5: 24, my emphasis). Is the flesh
and its lusts dead then? No. The sense is that the believer has come
to the same
judgment about these
things as God has. The flesh and its lusts are
condemned. The judgment is
death, and there is no right of appeal.
Christ Crucified and the Law
As that which condemns, the
cross is a legal device. This
relationship with the law is threefold:
1.
The obligations of the law are
met in Christ crucified. Thus: “and you, being dead in
offences and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, he has quickened
together with him, having forgiven us all the offences; having
effaced the handwriting in ordinances which [stood out] against us,
which was contrary to us,
he has taken it also out of
the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Col. 2: 13, 14, my
emphasis). What is taken out of the way and nailed to the cross is
not said to be our sins (or offences) as such, but the handwriting
in ordinances which stood against us. The force of the word
“handwriting” is an obligation
by which a man is bound by his own signature. This obligation is
annulled because Christ has met its demands at the cross. The law
demanded death on account of man’s failure but the handwriting in
ordinances nailed to the cross of Christ is judicial proof that the
charge is now null and void.
2.
The man who could not keep the
law is condemned and finished with in the cross. Christians
are often slow to realise this. Thus the Galatian saints “having
begun in Spirit” were attempting “to be made perfect in flesh” (Gal.
3: 3)—that is, through keeping the law. The apostle Paul meets this
error with the cross of Christ: “For
I, through law, have died
to law, that I may live to God. I am crucified with Christ, and no
longer live, I, but Christ
lives in me; but [in] that I now live in flesh, I live by faith, the
[faith] of the Son of God, who has loved me and given himself for
me” (Gal. 2: 20). Legal ordinances could not improve Paul, because
the old Paul had been crucified with Christ, and was finished with.
Furthermore, in the life of faith that he now lived, a better man
had come into view and he could say “Christ lives in me”! Law has
its application, not to Christians, but to “lawless and
insubordinate, to [the] impious and sinful” (1 Tim. 1: 9). The
sentence on such is “Cursed is every one who does not continue in
all things which [are] written in the book of the law to do them”
(Gal. 3: 10). Thank God then, that we also read that “Christ has
redeemed us out of the curse of the law, having become a curse for
us, (for it is written, Cursed [is] every one hanged upon a tree,)”
(v13)—in the cross, Christ has vicariously taken the curse upon
Himself.
3.
The cross is the means by
which another man is formed. The “law of commandments in
ordinances” (Eph. 2: 15) was the source of the enmity between Jew
and Gentile—the one had bound himself to be governed by it, the
other not. However, God has now set aside both sorts of men in
favour of one new man, “having annulled the enmity in his”
(Christ’s) “flesh, the law of commandments in ordinances, that he
might form the two” (Jew and Gentile) “in himself into
one new man” (my
emphasis). How has this been brought about? He has reconciled “both
in one body to God
by the cross, having
by it slain the enmity” (v16, my emphasis). Thus both Jew and
Gentile are brought to a judicial end in the cross in the eyes of
God, and replaced by the new man.
The Cross of the Disciple
However, the cross of Christ
is not the only cross in Scripture. When the Lord Jesus taught that
“he who does not take up his cross and follow after me is not worthy
of me” (Matt. 10: 38), the sense is each disciple taking up his
own cross. It is not the cross of Christ that is in view. The
setting of Matthew 10: 38 is clearly the growing rejection of the
Lord by His own people. In chapter 9, His works had been ascribed to
Satan (see v34), then in the earlier part of in chapter 10 He had
spoken of cities rejecting Him (see vs.14, 15), and later of His
disciples being delivered up, scourged and put to death (see vs 17,
21, 28). Against such a background the imagery of the disciple
taking up his own cross would be very vivid. The disciple is called
to be as his Lord: “If they have called the master of the house
Beelzebub, how much more those of his household?” (v25). This gives
force to the apostle’s chiding of the Hebrew saints: “ye have not
yet resisted unto blood” (Heb. 12: 4).
However, we must not imagine that the
disciple’s cross is simply a metaphor for the suffering he will find
in following Christ. The thought behind the imagery of Matthew 10:
38 is of
a condemned man carrying the
means of his own death. Death, not suffering, is the primary
lesson. That is why Mark’s account says “Whoever desires to come
after me, let him deny himself, and
take up his cross and follow me” (Mark 8: 34, my emphasis). Whether
martyred or not, each one truly taking up his cross no longer
attaches any importance to that which, as a natural man, he
previously made so much of. Thus: “For whosoever shall desire to
save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for
my sake shall find it” (Matt. 16: 25). That the lesson intended to
be conveyed is more than a merely physical one is proved by Luke 9:
23: “If any one will come after me, let him deny himself and take up
his cross
daily and follow me”.
It is thus an ongoing spiritual exercise. This denial of self is
what was exemplified later by the apostle of the Gentiles: “what
things were gain to me, these I counted, on account of Christ, loss”
(Phil. 3: 7).
Conclusion
One last thought: there are
a great many self–denying believers who hold to the idea of a
‘community church’. The self–denial is commendable, but Christians
are no more part of their supposed ‘community’ than the crucified
Christ was. He was outcast, hence the exhortation “let us go forth
to him without the camp, bearing his reproach: for we have not here
an abiding city, but we seek the coming one” (Heb. 13: 13, 14). Paul
understood this perfectly. On account of Christ, society had
rejected Paul, and Paul had rejected society: “far be it from me to
boast save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom [the]
world is crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6: 14). It is a
great thing for a disciple to take up his own cross and “deny
himself” (Matt. 16: 24), but it needs to be accompanied a
recognition that in the cross
of Christ God has not only finished with self, but also
with the world in which self
finds its fulfilment. “Where also their Lord was crucified”
(Rev. 11: 8) applies morally to ‘community’ as much as it does
literally to Jerusalem. It is the same world.
